Tuning a Model in Climatology and Calibrating One in Hydrogeology: An Informative Comparison

R. A. Weitzman

doi:doi:10.11648/j.ajtas.20221103.11

| Peer-Reviewed

Tuning a Model in Climatology and Calibrating One in Hydrogeology: An Informative Comparison

R. A. Weitzman

Published in American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics (Volume 11, Issue 3)

Received: 17 April 2022 Accepted: 5 May 2022 Published: 12 May 2022

Views: Downloads:

Download PDF

Share This Article

Twitter
Linked In
Facebook

Abstract

A November 2021 article in the journal Chance on a misuse of statistics by hydrogeologists in their modeling of water levels below ground raises the question of whether climatologists might be committing the same statistical errors in their modeling of global warming above ground. In seeking to answer that question, the research reported in this article finds the answer to be, yes, both research communities corrupt data by altering values of independent variables to reduce error variation or to achieve particular model results. That data alteration not only creates an impermissible negative correlation between estimates and errors but also creates model estimates that exaggerate trends in the observations. The exaggerated trends occur regardless of the nature or the intent of the data alteration. For that reason, use of trends in model estimates resulting from data alteration as a guide to future research or as a basis for conclusions may lead researchers astray. This article suggests an alternative research strategy consisting of random sampling of observation zones which, by limiting a study to thousands rather than millions of zones, could enable researchers to obtain sufficiently accurate input data to make the alteration of data unnecessary. Use of this procedure could also help avoid exaggerated and misleading predictions from models.

Published in	American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics (Volume 11, Issue 3)
DOI	10.11648/j.ajtas.20221103.11
Page(s)	83-88
Creative Commons	This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright	Copyright © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Science Publishing Group

Keywords

Tuning, Calibration, Linear Model, Estimation, Prediction, Error, Global Warming

References

[1]	Bellprat, O., Kotlarski, S., Lüthi, D. & Schär, C. (2012). Objective calibration of regional climate models. Journal of Geophysical Research, 117, 1-13.
[2]	Edwards, N. R., Cameron, D. & Rougier, J. (2011). Precalibrating an intermediate complexity climate model. Climate Dynamics, 37, 1469–1482.
[3]	Flato, G., J. Marotzke, B. Abiodun, P. Braconnot, S C. Chou, W. Collins, P. Cox, F. Driouech, S. Emori, V. Eyring, C. Forest, P. Gleckler, E. Guilyardi, C. Jakob, V. Kattsov, C. Reason and M. Rummukainen, 2013: Evaluation of Climate Models. In: Climate Change: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Stocker, T. F., D. Qin, G.-K. Plattner, M. Tignor, S. K. Allen, J. Boschung, A. Nauels, Y. Xia, V. Bex and P. M. Midgley (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA.
[4]	Fisher, R. A.: 1922. On the mathematical foundations of theoretical statistics. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal. Society, A222, 309–368.
[5]	Hourdin, F., Mauritsen, T, Gentleman, A., Golaz, J., Venkatramani, B., Duan, Q., Folini, D., Ji, D., Klocke, D., Rauser, F., Rio, C., Tomassini, L., Watanabe, M. & Williamson, D. (2017). The Art and Science of Climate Model Tuning, Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 98 (3), 589-602.
[6]	Jackson, C. S., Sen, M. K., Huerta, G. Deng, Y. & Bowman, K. P. (2008): Error reduction and convergence in climate prediction. Journal of Climate, 21, 6698–6709.
[7]	Koonin, S. E. (2021). Unsettled: What Climate Science Tells Us, What It Doesn’t, and Why It Matters. BenBella Books, Inc., Dallas, TX.
[8]	Lomborg, B. (2020). False Alarm: How Climate Change Costs Us Trillions, Hurts the Poor, and Fails to Fix the Planet. Basic Books, New York.
[9]	Mauritsen, T., Roeckner, E., Crueger, T, Stevens, B. et al. (2012). Tuning the climate of a global model. Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems, 4 (3), 1-18.
[10]	Mauritsen, T., Bader, J., Becker, T., Behrens, J., Bittner, M., Brokopf, R., Brovkin, V. et al., (2019). Developments in the MPI-M Earth System Model Version 1.2 (MPI-ESM1.2) and Its Response to Increasing CO₂. Journal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems, 11: 998–1038.
[11]	Nijsse, F. J. M. M., Cox, P. M. & Williamson, M. S. (2020). Emergent constraints on transient climate response (TCR) and equilibrium climate sensitivity (ECS) from historical warming in CMIP5 and CMIP6 models.” Earth System Dynamics 11, 737–750.
[12]	Rougier, J. C. (2007): Probabilistic inference for future climate using an ensemble of climate model evaluations. Climatic Change, 81, 247–264.
[13]	Shellenberger, M. (2020). Apocalypse Never: Why Environmental Alarmism Hurts Us All. Harper Collins, New York.
[14]	Weitzman, R. A. (2021): From divining rods to statistics: a forensic analysis of the misuse of statistics in the estimation of environmental impact. Chance, 34 (4), 18-20.
[15]	Wettzman, R. A. (2022). The determination of sample size in a Bayesian estimation of population proportions: how and why to do it in a regression framework American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics, 11 (1), 13-18.
[16]	Williamson, D., Goldstein, M., Allison, L., Blaker, A., Challenor, P., Jackson, L. & Yamazaki, K. (2013). History matching for exploring and reducing climate model parameter space using observations and a large perturbed physics ensemble. Climate Dynamics, 41, 1703–1729.
[17]	Yang, B. & Coauthors (2013): Uncertainty quantification and parameter tuning in the CAM5 Zhang-McFarlane convection scheme and impact of improved convection on the global circulation and climate. Journal of Geophysical Research. 118 (2), 395–415.
[18]	Zhang, T., Li, L., Lin, Y. Xue, W., Xie, F., Xu, H. & Huang, X. (2015). An automatic and effective parameter optimization method for model tuning. Geoscientific Model Development, 8, 3579–3591.
[19]	Zou, L., Qian, Y. Zhou, T. &Yang, B. (2014). Parameter tuning and calibration of RegCM3 with MIT–Emanuel cumulus parameterization scheme over CORDEX East Asia domain. Journal of Climate, 27, 7687–7701.

Cite This Article

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

R. A. Weitzman. (2022). Tuning a Model in Climatology and Calibrating One in Hydrogeology: An Informative Comparison. American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics, 11(3), 83-88. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajtas.20221103.11

Copy | Download

ACS Style

R. A. Weitzman. Tuning a Model in Climatology and Calibrating One in Hydrogeology: An Informative Comparison. Am. J. Theor. Appl. Stat. 2022, 11(3), 83-88. doi: 10.11648/j.ajtas.20221103.11

Copy | Download

AMA Style

R. A. Weitzman. Tuning a Model in Climatology and Calibrating One in Hydrogeology: An Informative Comparison. Am J Theor Appl Stat. 2022;11(3):83-88. doi: 10.11648/j.ajtas.20221103.11

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.ajtas.20221103.11,
  author = {R. A. Weitzman},
  title = {Tuning a Model in Climatology and Calibrating One in Hydrogeology: An Informative Comparison},
  journal = {American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics},
  volume = {11},
  number = {3},
  pages = {83-88},
  doi = {10.11648/j.ajtas.20221103.11},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajtas.20221103.11},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ajtas.20221103.11},
  abstract = {A November 2021 article in the journal Chance on a misuse of statistics by hydrogeologists in their modeling of water levels below ground raises the question of whether climatologists might be committing the same statistical errors in their modeling of global warming above ground. In seeking to answer that question, the research reported in this article finds the answer to be, yes, both research communities corrupt data by altering values of independent variables to reduce error variation or to achieve particular model results. That data alteration not only creates an impermissible negative correlation between estimates and errors but also creates model estimates that exaggerate trends in the observations. The exaggerated trends occur regardless of the nature or the intent of the data alteration. For that reason, use of trends in model estimates resulting from data alteration as a guide to future research or as a basis for conclusions may lead researchers astray. This article suggests an alternative research strategy consisting of random sampling of observation zones which, by limiting a study to thousands rather than millions of zones, could enable researchers to obtain sufficiently accurate input data to make the alteration of data unnecessary. Use of this procedure could also help avoid exaggerated and misleading predictions from models.},
 year = {2022}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Tuning a Model in Climatology and Calibrating One in Hydrogeology: An Informative Comparison
AU  - R. A. Weitzman
Y1  - 2022/05/12
PY  - 2022
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajtas.20221103.11
DO  - 10.11648/j.ajtas.20221103.11
T2  - American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics
JF  - American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics
JO  - American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics
SP  - 83
EP  - 88
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2326-9006
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajtas.20221103.11
AB  - A November 2021 article in the journal Chance on a misuse of statistics by hydrogeologists in their modeling of water levels below ground raises the question of whether climatologists might be committing the same statistical errors in their modeling of global warming above ground. In seeking to answer that question, the research reported in this article finds the answer to be, yes, both research communities corrupt data by altering values of independent variables to reduce error variation or to achieve particular model results. That data alteration not only creates an impermissible negative correlation between estimates and errors but also creates model estimates that exaggerate trends in the observations. The exaggerated trends occur regardless of the nature or the intent of the data alteration. For that reason, use of trends in model estimates resulting from data alteration as a guide to future research or as a basis for conclusions may lead researchers astray. This article suggests an alternative research strategy consisting of random sampling of observation zones which, by limiting a study to thousands rather than millions of zones, could enable researchers to obtain sufficiently accurate input data to make the alteration of data unnecessary. Use of this procedure could also help avoid exaggerated and misleading predictions from models.
VL  - 11
IS  - 3
ER  -

Copy | Download

Author Information

R. A. Weitzman

Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey, USA

Download PDF

Sections

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

R. A. Weitzman. (2022). Tuning a Model in Climatology and Calibrating One in Hydrogeology: An Informative Comparison. American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics, 11(3), 83-88. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajtas.20221103.11

Copy | Download

ACS Style

R. A. Weitzman. Tuning a Model in Climatology and Calibrating One in Hydrogeology: An Informative Comparison. Am. J. Theor. Appl. Stat. 2022, 11(3), 83-88. doi: 10.11648/j.ajtas.20221103.11

Copy | Download

AMA Style

R. A. Weitzman. Tuning a Model in Climatology and Calibrating One in Hydrogeology: An Informative Comparison. Am J Theor Appl Stat. 2022;11(3):83-88. doi: 10.11648/j.ajtas.20221103.11

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.ajtas.20221103.11,
  author = {R. A. Weitzman},
  title = {Tuning a Model in Climatology and Calibrating One in Hydrogeology: An Informative Comparison},
  journal = {American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics},
  volume = {11},
  number = {3},
  pages = {83-88},
  doi = {10.11648/j.ajtas.20221103.11},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajtas.20221103.11},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ajtas.20221103.11},
  abstract = {A November 2021 article in the journal Chance on a misuse of statistics by hydrogeologists in their modeling of water levels below ground raises the question of whether climatologists might be committing the same statistical errors in their modeling of global warming above ground. In seeking to answer that question, the research reported in this article finds the answer to be, yes, both research communities corrupt data by altering values of independent variables to reduce error variation or to achieve particular model results. That data alteration not only creates an impermissible negative correlation between estimates and errors but also creates model estimates that exaggerate trends in the observations. The exaggerated trends occur regardless of the nature or the intent of the data alteration. For that reason, use of trends in model estimates resulting from data alteration as a guide to future research or as a basis for conclusions may lead researchers astray. This article suggests an alternative research strategy consisting of random sampling of observation zones which, by limiting a study to thousands rather than millions of zones, could enable researchers to obtain sufficiently accurate input data to make the alteration of data unnecessary. Use of this procedure could also help avoid exaggerated and misleading predictions from models.},
 year = {2022}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Tuning a Model in Climatology and Calibrating One in Hydrogeology: An Informative Comparison
AU  - R. A. Weitzman
Y1  - 2022/05/12
PY  - 2022
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajtas.20221103.11
DO  - 10.11648/j.ajtas.20221103.11
T2  - American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics
JF  - American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics
JO  - American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics
SP  - 83
EP  - 88
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2326-9006
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajtas.20221103.11
AB  - A November 2021 article in the journal Chance on a misuse of statistics by hydrogeologists in their modeling of water levels below ground raises the question of whether climatologists might be committing the same statistical errors in their modeling of global warming above ground. In seeking to answer that question, the research reported in this article finds the answer to be, yes, both research communities corrupt data by altering values of independent variables to reduce error variation or to achieve particular model results. That data alteration not only creates an impermissible negative correlation between estimates and errors but also creates model estimates that exaggerate trends in the observations. The exaggerated trends occur regardless of the nature or the intent of the data alteration. For that reason, use of trends in model estimates resulting from data alteration as a guide to future research or as a basis for conclusions may lead researchers astray. This article suggests an alternative research strategy consisting of random sampling of observation zones which, by limiting a study to thousands rather than millions of zones, could enable researchers to obtain sufficiently accurate input data to make the alteration of data unnecessary. Use of this procedure could also help avoid exaggerated and misleading predictions from models.
VL  - 11
IS  - 3
ER  -

Copy | Download